NOTABLE EMPLOYMENT, CIVIL RIGHTS, AND EDUCATION LAW TRIALS, VERDICTS, AND SETTLEMENTS IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER:

During the summer of 2016, tenants Megan McFadden, Lonnie White, and A.J. White sought reasonable accommodations on account of their disabilities from their landlord: the Meeker Housing Authority (“MHA”).  Specifically, our clients sought the right to live with their emotional support animals, which they needed to manage their mental health disabilities.  In response to our clients’ requests for reasonable accommodation, MHA enacted unlawful policies to make it impossible for our clients to continue living at MHA with their assistance animals.  When Ms. McFadden pleaded to be allowed to keep her dog, Chewy, in her home, MHA’s Executive Director told her to “take us to court.”  The firm of Rathod | Mohamedbhai did just that, fighting for nearly three years before settling the case on the eve of trial for $1,000,000.

The case made history when Plaintiffs filed for and secured summary judgment on their claims in advance of trial.  In February 2019, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado held that Plaintiffs were disabled as a matter of law and that Defendant MHA unlawfully discriminated against them by refusing to reasonably accommodate their disabilities.  We are unaware of any other case in which a court has made such a ruling on behalf of the filing party.

Estate of Veach v. City of Rawlins, WY, et al. – Resolved Spring 2019

On December 30, 2015, John Randall Veach was shot and killed by police officers in Rawlins, Wyoming when he attempted to evade arrest by driving away in his pickup truck.  To justify the shooting, the officers alleged that Mr. Veach was driving his pickup truck in their direction, and that they needed to use deadly force for their own safety.  Our investigation — including extensive review of video, photographs, tire marks, and eyewitness testimony by another law enforcement officer — showed a different story.  Just months before trial, the City of Rawlins settled the case for $925,000, one of the largest outcomes in an excessive force case in Wyoming.

Khan, et al. v. Katina Gatchis – Resolved Spring 2019

In December 2017, Katina Gatchis declared that she would not lease commercial real estate to a father and son business team because they were Muslim and not American.  According to Defendant Gatchis, the Khans would “bring all the Muslims from the Middle East and then I have a problem around here.  Bomb, boom. Bomb, boom.”  Utterly shocked and dismayed by these statements, our firm filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Khans as well as Craig Caldwell, the individual who had been trying to convince Ms. Gatchis to allow the Khans to lease from her.  Despite there being audio recordings of Ms. Gatchis’ unlawful statements, Ms. Gatchis zealously defended against the litigation.  The case ultimately settled for $675,000 after Ms. Gatchis filed pleadings in court admitting to having violated the law just days before trial was set to commence.

Jane Doe v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved December 2018

In August 2017, Jane Doe was terminated from her employment with XYZ Corporation.  Ms. Doe had worked for the company for 45 years, beginning her career as one of its first employees.  Ms. Doe’s termination came on the heels of the company’s attempts to force her to retire, which she had refused to do.  Rathod | Mohamedbhai brought charges of age discrimination against XYZ Corporation and ultimately secured a settlement of $575,000 for Ms. Doe.

Prairie Middle School Students v. Cherry Creek School District – Resolved Fall 2018

In 2017, news broke that Brian Vasquez, a teacher employed by the Cherry Creek School District, had been sexually assaulting his middle-school students over the course of five years.  Rathod | Mohamedbhai was honored and privileged to represent the survivors who had suffered from his abuse.  The case ultimately resulted in an $11.5 million settlement as well as significant changes to school district policy, widespread trainings for both teachers and students, and the provision of mental health resources for students and parents.  Mr. Vasquez pled guilty and is serving a sentence of 40 years to life in prison.

Said Ali, et al. v. Cargill Meat Solutions & Teamsters Local No. 455 – Resolved Summer 2018

In September 2018, it was announced that Cargill Meat Solutions (Cargill), Rathod Mohamedbhai LLC, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) had reached a settlement to resolve EEOC charges filed on behalf of 138 Somali-American Muslim workers.

In their charges, the workers alleged wrongful termination based on discrimination and the wrongful revocation of a religious accommodation policy that permitted them to take short breaks to perform their obligatory prayers in accordance with their sincerely-held beliefs.  While Cargill did not accept the basis of these EEOC complaints, it decided to settle the matter out of court to avoid a protracted legal proceeding and provide all parties with a path forward.

The agreement includes a financial settlement of $1,500,000 for the 138 terminated employees, inclusive of attorneys’ fees and costs.  In conjunction with this agreement, Cargill has reaffirmed its commitment to continue to allow Muslim workers to take short breaks to perform their obligatory prayers.

Cargill’s religious accommodation policy takes into account key business requirements, such as employee and food safety, and production line needs.  “Providing our employees with religious accommodation is an important part of engaging and supporting our employees, and our policy has remained consistent for more than 10 years,” said Brian Sikes, president of Cargill Meat Solutions.  “We are gratified with the settlement reached for the 138 former Cargill employees that we represented in this proceeding and applaud the company for its ongoing efforts to consistently grant prayer requests to people of all faiths based on its longstanding policy and values,” stated Qusair Mohamedbhai of Denver law firm Rathod Mohamedbhai LLC.  “We appreciate the collaborative efforts of Cargill and Cargill’s commitment to continue to communicate its longstanding prayer accommodation practices.”  “We commend Cargill for reaching this settlement with 138 of its former employees and for valuing the religious diversity of its workers,” said CAIR National Litigation Director Lena Masri. “We applaud this settlement, which represents a mutually agreeable resolution of this case, and we welcome Cargill’s commitment to accommodating the religious needs of Muslim workers and workers of other faith backgrounds.”

The Teamsters Local No. 455 settled the case against them for $153,000, bringing the total settlement to $1,653,000.

Estate of Byrd v. City of Pueblo – Resolved Summer 2018

In the early morning of February 5, 2017, a City of Pueblo police officer shot and killed Andrew Byrd as Mr. Byrd was driving his car away from the officer.  According to the officer, he believed he saw Mr. Byrd lean over and pick up a gun after ordering Mr. Byrd to step out of the car.  Our investigation uncovered that there were no weapons – let alone a gun – found in Mr. Byrd’s car.  An intensive review of the body camera footage established that the police officer had engaged in an execution-style murder of Mr. Byrd, pausing to aim his gun at Mr. Byrd’s temple as Mr. Byrd drove past.  The officer voluntarily resigned from the police force, and the case settled for $600,000 for Mr. Byrd’s estate.

Jane Doe v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved February 2018

In fall 2016, Jane Doe received a summons for jury duty.  On the day she appeared for jury duty, Ms. Doe received numerous calls from her employer.  Ms. Doe repeatedly informed her employer that she had been instructed by the presiding judge not to take phone calls during jury duty, which caused her supervisor to become increasingly frustrated with her.  Ultimately, fearing retaliation, Ms. Doe informed the presiding judge of her predicament.  The presiding judge then called her employer and notified him that he could not retaliate against Ms. Doe on account of her serving on a jury.  Nine days later, XYZ Corporation terminated Ms. Doe’s employment.  Our firm brought a lawsuit on Ms. Doe’s behalf, which ultimately resolved in advance of trial for $198,000.

Shiva Rai v. St. Vrain Valley School District – Resolved Summer 2017

Shiva Rai is a Nepalese male who suffers from severe autism.  He is non-verbal, has extremely limited communication abilities, and is reliant on caretakers for even the most basic of human needs.  At the time of our representation of Shiva, he was a 20-year-old at-risk adult who had been physically, emotionally, and mentally abused by his bus aide Monica Burke for approximately six months.  We settled Shiva’s case for $3.85 million.

Due to his severe autism, Shiva was unable to tell anyone that he was being abused.  Based upon our investigation, the only person on that bus who could have intervened was bus driver William Hall.  But rather than report Ms. Burke’s crimes, Mr. Hall remained silent.  Both Ms. Burke and Mr. Hall were criminally charged for their abuse of Shiva.  Ms. Burke was ultimately sentenced to 20 months in jail after pleading guilty, and Mr. Hall received a 60-day jail sentence upon being convicted at trial.

Estate of Jacquez v. City of Rocky Ford – Resolved Spring 2017

Jack Jacquez was 27-years-old when he was shot and killed by Rocky Ford police officer James Ashby in October 2014.  Officer Ashby first spotted Mr. Jacquez skateboarding down the street in the middle of the night, with no traffic on the road.  Despite having committed no crime, Mr. Jacquez found himself being followed home by Officer Ashby.  Without any probable cause, Officer Ashby exited his patrol car and followed Mr. Jacquez onto his property.

As Officer Ashby followed Mr. Jacquez into his yard, Mr. Jacquez started pounding on the door for his mother or fiancee to wake up and let him inside.  Officer Ashby grabbed Mr. Jacquez by the wrist as the young man’s mother opened the door.  Despite the occupant of the house voluntarily opening the door for Mr. Jacquez, Officer Ashby claimed that he believed Mr. Jacquez was breaking into the house.  As Mr. Jacquez walked away from Officer Ashby – who had let go of his wrist – the officer shot and killed him.  This egregious murder resulted in a 16-year prison term for Officer Ashby as well as a $1,300,000 settlement for Mr. Jacquez’s estate.

Estate of Jessica Hernandez v. City and County of Denver, et al. – Resolved Spring 2017

The Jessica Hernandez case made national headline news as the country was swept up in the heartbreaking and tragic death of a teenage girl.  In our estimation, on January 26, 2015, Denver Police Department (DPD) Officers recklessly ran up to the Honda Civic being driven by then-17-year-old Jessie Hernandez and killed her with shots from the side of the car.  Based on our review of the materials in the case, neither officer was in any serious danger at the time shots were fired.  DPD conducted a two-year-long investigation into the shooting death, and it ultimately found that its officers acted within policy, would not be disciplined, and in fact were considered for commendation.

In our view, the DPD officers who shot and killed Jessie violated her Fourth Amendment right to be from excessive, deadly force.  We bolstered our legal analysis with the opinion of a nationally-regarded use of force expert who found that the DPD Officers had acted outside the bounds of best police practices when they shot at Jessie’s vehicle.  The opinion of an accident reconstruction and ballistics expert also confirmed that the officers were not in danger when they fired the lethal bullets.

We were ultimately able to settle Jessie’s case for $1,000,000.  The national attention the case received and our insistence that DPD reconsider its use of force policy ultimately resulted in changes being made to DPD’s high-risk vehicle stop and shooting into moving vehicles policies.

Estate of Jane Doe v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved Spring 2017

Our firm was saddened and privileged to represent the estate of a woman who died while being held in a local Colorado jail.  At the time of her medical screen, Ms. Doe disclosed that she had an alcohol problem and that she drank a fifth of alcohol every other day, while also smelling of alcohol during booking.  Despite staff recognizing that Ms. Doe was at risk of alcohol withdrawal, a dangerous and unpredictable condition, no one from the jail took any steps to monitor her condition.  Despite showing severe signs of withdrawal, nearly ten hours passed before any medical staff checked in on Ms. Doe.  Even after her worsened symptoms were witnessed by medical staff, Ms. Doe was never sent to the emergency room.  Ms. Doe died in her jail cell approximately 25 hours after being booked in.  The case resolved for $675,000 for Ms. Doe’s estate.

Araujo, et al. v. City of Fort Collins – Resolved January 2017

In September 2016, our law firm brought suit against the City of Fort Collins alleging systemic race and national origin discrimination that had permeated its police force over the past half-century.  Representing two Latino officers, our investigation uncovered countless scenarios where Latinx officers had been treated differently and given fewer opportunities than their Caucasian counterparts.  In January 2017, we resolved the case for $425,000 and numerous systemic changes, including additional training for staff regarding discrimination, harassment and retaliation in the workplace, the creation and development of an independent Equal Employment Opportunity office run through the City Manager’s Office, and a commitment towards achieving a workforce that reflects the diversity of the community within five years of executing the agreement.

Contreras, et al. v. Thomas Wright & Rent-Rite Super Kegs West d/b/a Wright Group Events – Resolved December 2016

Rathod | Mohamedbhai brought claims of wage theft and race and national origin discrimination on behalf of five Latinx workers who were underpaid and mistreated for years under the leadership of Thomas Wright at Wright Group Events.  The case resolved for $200,000 in December 2016 in a Court-approved settlement, which has since been increased to a $300,000 judgment by Court order.

Jane Doe v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved November 2016

Our firm was honored to represent Jane Doe, the victim of a medical disorder requiring the use of a service animal, in a case against her landlord XYZ Corporation, which had repeatedly denied her the right to reasonable accommodations.  Not only did XYZ Corporation relentlessly harass Ms. Doe over the need for her service animal, but they also began sanctioning the person from whom she sublet her condo in an attempt to pressure him into breaking his sublease agreement with her.  Our investigation uncovered countless emails between agents of XYZ Corporation establishing their cruelty and callousness towards Ms. Doe, and we were ultimately able to resolve her case for $220,000.

Naeschylus Carter-Vinzant v. City of Aurora, et al. – Resolved Fall 2016

On March 6, 2015, Naeschylus L. Carter-Vinzant was fatally shot by Aurora Police Department Officer Paul Jerothe, a member of the Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team.  Mr. Carter was unarmed, and our investigation revealed that he posed no threat justifying lethal force.  And yet, Officer Jerothe shot Mr. Carter almost immediately upon their encounter.  The lone bullet pierced Mr. Carter’s right lung and completely severed his spinal cord, causing Mr. Carter to bleed to death within minutes.

Officer Jerothe later claimed that he fired his gun because Mr. Carter had been non-compliant with police commands, and he feared Mr. Carter had a gun on him.  Numerous eye witnesses attested that Mr. Carter’s hands were either raised or in the midst of being raised at the time he was shot and killed.  And no weapons were found on Mr. Carter.  After an in-depth investigation by our legal team and with the support of expert witnesses who found that the force used against Mr. Carter was excessive and unwarranted, our firm resolved Mr. Carter’s case for $2.6 million in a historic settlement with the City of Aurora.

Baltazar, et al. v. Vail Run Resorts – Resolved February 2016

In 2013, our firm filed charges of discrimination on behalf of two women who had suffered egregious forms of sexual harassment in the workplace at the hands of their supervisor, Omar Quezada, at Vail Run Resorts.  The case quickly ballooned as more individuals came forward, with the EEOC ultimately making a cause finding in the case and filing suit on behalf of eight victims.  We partnered with the EEOC to bring claims of discrimination based on their gender, race, and national origin, as well as retaliation.  The claims stemmed from widespread, unchecked, and severe sexual harassment as well as harassment and extortion suffered at the hands of Mr. Quezada.  We alleged that Vail Run’s management was complicit in allowing and perpetuating this conduct, and in the retaliation against several of the charging parties after they reported it.

Mr. Quezada’s harassment of our clients included instances where he came up from behind them and groped them, exposed his genitals to them, and attempted to rape them.  Pursuant to our investigation, we learned that Mr. Quezada made constant inappropriate comments and jokes of a sexual nature, showed pictures of naked women and male and female genitalia on his phone, and commented about his female employees’ bodies and body parts.  Mr. Quezada “trained” his employees that making false allegations of sexual harassment could get them in trouble.  He also constantly reminded them that as undocumented immigrants they had no rights and that he could have them deported at any time.

Amanda Wilson v. Jonathan Pauling, et al. – Jury Verdict Issued Fall 2015

On October 23, 2015, we obtained a jury verdict of $3,982,136.  Our client Amanda Wilson had been violently sexually assaulted, strangled, and bitten by her boss, Jonathan Pauling, causing her significant emotional and psychological distress as well as the loss of her job.  A Denver District Court jury found for Ms. Wilson on three claims for relief: assault, battery, and intentional interference with contract.  The jury found that not only had Jonathan Pauling engaged in offensive contact with Ms. Wilson, but that he put her in fear for her life, awarding her $1,300,000 for her assault claim in addition to $1,682,136 on her battery claim.  Moreover, the jury held Mr. Pauling responsible for Ms. Wilson’s inability to return to work, awarding her $1,000,000 after she testified that no one could go back to work after their boss rapes them.  After trial concluded, the court awarded Ms. Wilson an additional $2.1 million in punitive damages against Jonathan Pauling.  Combined with the jury verdict and pre-judgment interest, Ms. Wilson’s award amounted to $6.3 million.

Ms. Wilson stands as a beacon to the community of survivors of sexual assault, many of whom are women whose voices are all too often silenced.  After indicating that no one would believe Ms. Wilson’s story – the story of a former exotic dancer – the Denver DA lowered the charges against Mr. Pauling from felony sexual assault to misdemeanor unlawful sexual contact.  Mr. Pauling spent mere hours in jail because he was a wealthy businessman who convinced the DA that incarceration would negatively impact his professional interests.  Ms. Wilson, like many other survivors, found no voice through the criminal justice system.  And after turning to the civil system, Mr. Pauling attempted to win his case through victim blaming, insisting that Ms. Wilson seduced him, that she forced him to rape her.  The jury was not convinced.  Through Ms. Wilson’s case, the Denver community has sent a message loud and clear to perpetrators of sexual assault that their actions will not be tolerated, and it has encouraged survivors that they can and should speak up.

Jane Doe v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved Spring 2015

In 2015, Rathod | Mohamedbhai resolved a case on behalf of Jane Doe for $250,000 to compensate Ms. Doe for the blatant and ongoing sexual harassment she suffered at the hands of the owner of XYZ Corporation.  This harassment took the form of physical and communicated sexual advances, frequent inappropriate sexual comments, and an ongoing communication of the owner’s desire for Ms. Doe.  It quickly became clear to Ms. Doe that, although she refused to engage physically with the owner, she had to maintain a personal relationship with him to keep her employment with XYZ Corporation.  The owner, meanwhile, criticized Ms. Doe when he was unhappy with their personal relationship, and he demonstrated extreme jealousy toward Ms. Doe’s boyfriend.  When Ms. Doe revealed that she and her boyfriend had gotten married, XYZ Corporation retaliated against her by immediately terminating her employment.  Our firm filed a charge of discrimination on behalf of Ms. Doe and were subsequently able to resolve her case outside of litigation.

Guzzo, et al. v. State of Wyoming – Resolved in Fall 2014

Our law firm was proud to represent same-sex couples within the State of Wyoming as they challenged the state’s ban on gay marriage.  In October 2014, Judge Scott W. Skavdahl of the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming ruled in favor of the freedom to marry regardless of sex.  The court’s order required the state to allow couples to begin marrying immediately.  The following year, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the fundamental right to marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Jamal Hunter v. The City and County of Denver, et al. – Resolved Summer 2014

On July 18, 2011, Jamal Hunter screamed for help as he was beaten and his genitals were scalded with boiling water by fellow inmates.  Denver Sheriff deputies failed to intervene or perform adequate rounds during Mr. Hunter’s brutal assault and scalding.  On July 31, 2011, one week after he was released from the hospital, Mr. Hunter was assaulted, choked, and tased by other Denver Sheriff’s deputies.  This incident was caught on video.  The law firm of Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC brought civil rights claims for failure to protect, excessive force, failure to train and supervise, and failure to address unlawful systemic and cultural issues within the Denver Detention Center.  During the litigation, a key witness was threatened by two Denver Police officers, and documents were hidden, which resulted in Denver’s private lawyers withdrawing from the case and a federal judge unsealing numerous documents.  The judge also requested a criminal investigation into the two Denver Police officers and a federal investigation into the Denver Sheriff Department and Denver Police Department.  This high profile lawsuit shed much light upon the corruption within the City and County of Denver, including the smuggling of contraband into the jail by a deputy and widespread failure to discipline deputies and investigate inmate complaints of abuse.  This case, which garnered national attention, resulted in the requested resignation the Denver Sheriff, the resignation of the Denver City Attorney, and external investigations into the practices of the Denver Sheriff Department, Denver Police Department, and Denver City Attorney’s Office.  In August 2014, the case settled for $3.25 million, which was the largest civil rights settlement in the history of the City and County of Denver at that time.

Ortega et al. v. The City and County of Denver et al. (Denver Diner) – Resolved Fall 2013

This lawsuit became well known throughout Colorado and the nation as the Denver Diner case.  On July 12, 2009, a Denver Police Department officer worked off-duty security at the Denver Diner restaurant when he encountered our client being attacked by another patron.  The lawsuit alleged that he dragged our client outside while her friend followed and protested the officer’s conduct.  At the same time, another two of our clients arrived in a bicycle cab in front of the Diner.  As the two women approached the entrance, a second Denver Police Officer, who had arrived as backup, barreled through them.  When our client protested being shoved, the lawsuit alleged that both officers responded with an onslaught of excessive and unnecessary force, including haphazard pepper spraying, shoving our clients to the ground, picking one up by her neck and punching another in the face while handcuffed.  The incident was captured by a High Activity Location Observation (HALO) camera.  Initially hidden by Denver, the surveillance tape was released nearly two years after the event.

The case garnered widespread public and media attention, not only for the egregious incident, but also for exposing the Denver Police Department’s failure to address its systematic problem of unbridled police brutality.  The lawsuit alleged that the officers falsified accounts of the assault of the four women in their reports, omitting numerous details of the force they exercised.  The two officers were eventually fired only after their conduct was brought to light through the lawsuit.

This lawsuit required the interviews dozens of witnesses and review of over one hundred thousand pages of discovery.  We uncovered substantial evidence proving that Denver trains its officers to engage in excessive force, that Denver police officers systemically fail to report excessive force by other officers, and that Denver’s Internal Affairs Bureau routinely whitewashes police misconduct and fails to investigate community complaints.

The Honorable William J. Martinez of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado allowed municipal liability claims to proceed to trial “based on Denver’s custom of failing to adequately and timely investigate citizen complaints for excessive force and to timely and properly discipline the officers implicated therein.”

The case settled for $360,000 prior to trial.  Because of the lawsuit’s exposure of failure to properly train and discipline its officers, Denver has instituted broad changes including the overhaul of the entire Denver Police Department disciplinary hearing system allowing for faster, expedient, and robust discipline.  The work in this case resulted in this law firm being co-awarded the 2013 Colorado Trial Lawyer Association Case of Year.

Susan Chandler v. Adams 14 School District, et al. – Resolved December 2012

Former superintendent Dr. Susan Chandler, through her attorneys at Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC, and Adams 14 School District, through its attorneys, have negotiated a resolution of the claims arising from Dr. Chandler’s employment.  The District adamantly denies Dr. Chandler’s claims of wrongful termination and maintains it elected not to renew her contract because the District needed a change in leadership.  Its contribution of $380,000 to the total settlement is for the sole purpose of avoiding the expense and time associated with litigation.  It was publicly reported that the total settlement for Dr. Chandler was $700,000.00.

Jane Doe, et al. v. County of XYZ, et al., (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved Fall 2012

In 2012, Ms. Doe was incarcerated by the County of XYZ.  While incarcerated she was subject to unwanted and harmful medical treatment.  She was further forcibly stripped and cavity searched by three law enforcement officers, including one male.  The law firm of Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC raised claims of violations of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and violations of Colorado Revised Statute § 16-3-405(2) regarding strip searches.  The case settled for $250,000.

Jane Doe, et al. v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved Summer 2012

In 2010, Ms. Doe was evicted, on Christmas Eve, from her residence based on her disability and for having a service animal.  The law firm of Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC filed charges under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 3602(h), on her behalf.  The case settled for $200,000.

Jane Doe v. XYZ Corporation, et al., (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved February 2012

In 2011, Ms. Doe was assaulted in a domestic violence incident outside of work by a co-worker.  Criminal charges were filed and a restraining order was put into place prohibiting the co-worker from being within 100 yards of Ms. Doe.  XYZ Corporation then began a campaign of harassing and intimidating Ms. Doe, required her to have the restraining order modified to allow her attacker to come back to work, and eventually fired her.  The law firm of Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC brought claims of gender discrimination and retaliation under Title VII, Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy, Intentional Interference with Contract, and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.  The case settled for $850,000.

Jane Doe, et al. v. XYZ Corporation, (Confidential Settlement) – Resolved Fall 2011

In 2011, three long time female workers experienced gender discrimination at the hands of a male supervisor.  One of the three women was terminated.  The law firm of Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC brought claims of gender discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and Intentional Interference with Contract.  The case settled for $275,000.

*Disclaimer: Rathod | Mohamedbhai LLC does not guarantee specific results based on previous case results. Individual results vary on a case by case basis.